Clare Bronfman's attorney, Kathleen Cassidy [above] seeks info from the prosecution.

Bronfman attorney informs judge that prosecution has not given necessary information to defense

Clare Bronfman’s attorney, Kathleen Cassidy, has filed a letter to the court complaining to Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis that the prosecution has not provided her client with most of the information she and other attorneys for NXIVM defendants requested in August.

While admitting that the prosecution has revealed the identities of the victims – named as Jane and John Does in the indictment – most of the information requested has not to date been provided, Cassidy says.

In general terms, here is a quick overview of what the NXIVM defendants are seeking from AUSA Moira Kim Penza and AUSA Tanya Hajjar.  While much of it is redundant, a careful read of the list will explain a lot about the case and what the government and defense will try in turn to prove and defend.

The defense is asking the government to specify or identify the following:

RE: The Conspiracy Counts:
Every individual the government contends are co-conspirators—including:
(a) unindicted co-conspirators.
(b) cooperating witnesses.
(c) confidential sources.

RE: “The “Enterprise”:
1. individuals referred to as “others”.
2. every member, leader, or associate of the Enterprise including whether each person was a leader, member, or associate.
3. date, time, and location of the formation of the Enterprise.
4. all persons involved in forming the Enterprise.
5. crimes or actions the government will use in an attempt to prove the existence of an Enterprise.
6. how that Enterprise functioned.

RE: Count One (Racketeering Conspiracy):
1. Date, time and location of the agreements to conspire.
2. Parties that created the alleged conspiracy.
3. Individuals referred to as “others”.
4. Date, time and location of agreements.
5. Parties that agreed to commit at least two acts of racketeering.

RE: Racketeering Act One (Conspiracy to Commit Identity Theft):
1. Alleged acts constituting a conspiracy to commit identity theft of Jane Doe 1’s identity.
2. Alleged acts constituting a conspiracy to unlawfully possess Jane Doe 1’s sheriff’s identification card.

RE: Racketeering Act Two (Conspiracy to Commit Identity Theft):
1. Date, time and location of agreements [to conspire].
2. Parties that created the alleged conspiracies to commit identity theft.
3. John Doe 1 and John Doe 2.
4. The role Nancy Salzman played in the conspiracy to commit identity theft.
5. What conduct occurred between August 2005 and January 2006, before the alleged identity theft of John Does 1 and 2.
6. Alleged acts constituting the crime of identity theft.

RE: Racketeering Act Three (Conspiracy to Alter Records for Use in an Official Proceeding):
[This refers to a video used in the NXIVM v Ross case that was allegedly altered to deceive the court in the case]
1. Date, time and location of agreements.
2. The parties that created the alleged conspiracy to alter records for use in an official proceeding.
3. What was done to alter, destroy, mutilate and conceal the video recording of Nancy Salzman?
4. What manner the integrity of the video recording was impaired.
5. The video recordings allegedly altered.
6. The date [altered] records were allegedly produced to the Ross Institute.

RE: Racketeering Act Four (Conspiracy to Commit Identity Theft – Jane Doe 2):
1. Date, time and location of agreements.
2. Parties that created the alleged conspiracy to commit identity theft.
3. Identify Jane Doe 2.
4. Alleged acts constituting the crime of conspiracy to commit identity theft.

RE: Racketeering Act Five (Encouraging and Inducing Illegal Entry and Money Laundering – Jane Doe 3):
[This involves Clare Bronfman and her alleged role in bringing to the USA an alien]
1. Jane Doe 3.
2. Acts allegedly undertaken by Ms. Bronfman to “encourage and induce an alien…to come to, enter and reside in the United States”.
3. Date, amount, originating account, and receiving account of each wire transfer.
4. The “financial gain” or intended financial gain and the alleged beneficiary.
RE: Racketeering Act Six (Trafficking of Jane Doe 4 for Labor and Services): Identify or Specify:
[The woman was imprisoned in a room for 18 months]
1. Jane Doe 4.
2. “Labor and services” Jane Doe 4 provided and for whose benefit.
3. Which “immigration documents and actual government identification documents” that were concealed, removed, confiscated and possessed.

RE: Racketeering Act Seven (State Law Extortion):
[This alleges defendants extorted ‘lower ranking DOS members’ to do things based on fear their collateral would be released]
1. DOS members who allegedly delivered property and other things of value to “Raniere, Mack, Lauren Salzman, and others.
2. “Personal property and other things of value” that “lower-ranking DOS members” delivered.
3. Actions taken by “Raniere, Mack, Lauren Salzman, and others” that instilled fear that they would “expose a secret”etc.
4. Individuals the government contends Raniere, Mack, Lauren Salzman and/or “others” aided or abetted.

RE: Racketeering Act Eight (Sex Trafficking):
1. Date, time, location, and participants in each alleged “commercial sex act”.
2. Conduct that constitutes a “commercial sex act”.
3. Individuals referred to as “others”.
4. Jane Doe 5.
5. Each and every “benefit” allegedly given or received by any person.
6. Individual(s) who gave or received a thing of value, as well as dates and times of actions.
7. “means of force, threats of force, fraud and coercion” allegedly used.
8. Individuals the government contends Raniere, Mack, and/or “others” aided or abetted.

RE: Racketeering Acts Eight and Nine (Forced Labor):
1. Each and every “labor and service” allegedly performed.
2. Jane Doe 6.
3. Each and every act that constitutes:
(a) force;
(b) physical restraint;
(c) threats of physical restraint;
(d) serious harm;
(e) threats of serious harm; an d
(f) schemes, plan, and patterns intended to cause Jane Doe 5 and Jane Doe 6 to believe that, if Jane Doe 5/6 did not perform such labor and services, Jane Doe 5/6 and one or more other persons would suffer serious harm.
RE: Racketeering Acts Eight and Nine (State Law Extortion):
1. Acts, including date, time and location, taken by Ms. Mack and Ms. Salzman that caused Jane Doe 5 and Jane Doe 6 to deliver property to Ms. Mack and Ms. Salzman and others.
2. Property delivered.
3. Actions taken by Mack and Salzman that instilled fear that she would “expose a secret and publicize an asserted fact…”,etc.
4. Individuals government contends Mack and Salzman and/or “others” aided or abetted

Racketeering Act Ten (Conspiracy to Commit Identity Theft):
1. Jane Doe 7.
2. Conduct constituting the basis of any willful attempt to evade or defeat the assessment or payment of a tax.
3. Set forth the amount of any tax allegedly evaded.
4. Conduct constituting tax evasion.

RE: Count Four (Sex Trafficking Conspiracy):
1. Date, time and location of agreements.
2. Parties that created the alleged conspiracy to commit sex trafficking.
3. Date, time, location, and participants in each alleged “commercial sex acts”.
4. Conduct that constitutes a “commercial sex act”.
5. Individuals referred to as “others”.
6. The venture, including every member of that venture.
7. Each thing of value that was allegedly agreed to be given or received by any person.
8. The individual who agreed to give or receive.
9. Dates and times of such actions.
10. Specific date and time each thing of value allegedly was transacted and by whom.
11. Each and every “benefit,” including financial benefit(s) or thing(s) of value, allegedly agreed to be received by defendants Raniere, Mack, and “others,” from their alleged participation in the ventures.
12. Date, time, and location that such benefits were allegedly agreed to be conferred and by whom.
13. The “means of force, threats of force, fraud and coercion” allegedly used.

RE: Count Six (Attempted Sex Trafficking – Jane Doe 8):
1. Date, time, location.
2. Participants in each alleged attempt to “cause such person to engage in one or more commercial sex acts”.
3. Conduct that constitutes a “commercial sex act” for each alleged attempt.
4. Individuals referred to as “others”.
5. The venture, including every member of that venture.
6. Jane Doe 8.
7. Each thing of value allegedly agreed to be given or received by any person.
8. Identities of the individual who agreed to give or receive.
9. Dates and times of such actions.
11. Each and every “benefit,” received by defendants Raniere, Mack, and “others”.
12. “Means of force, threats of force, fraud and coercion” allegedly attempted to be used.
13. Each substantial step the government contends was taken by Raniere, Mack and “others” in furtherance of the alleged crime, including date and time of such alleged substantial step.

RE: Criminal Forfeiture:
1. Specify the property or assets subject to forfeiture.
2. The amount of money subject to forfeiture.
3. How the property or asset was used or intended to be used to commit the offense.
4. Itemization of the actual or contemplated loss or losses from each defendant’s alleged conduct.


As we see from the indictment, there are eight Jane Does and two John Does.

That makes 10 victims. There will also be witnesses and documents presented to the jury.

Of course, as I said before, there is an 800-pound gorilla looming – the superseding indictment – which may significantly alter the landscape of charges and the defense of those charges.

Based on the above list, a picture of what the trial will look like emerges.

There is evidently a lot to present and defend. And if half of it is provable, the defendants – each with their various charges – may find it hard to win an acquittal.

The information the defense seeks – and claims it has not received – is vital to conducting a proper defense. It will also help establish how strong the prosecution’s case is, which might prompt attempts at plea bargains.

I suspect, however, that the prosecution has such a strong case and witnesses – as well as a group of very believable victims – that the plea deals offered will not be very much less than the maximum sentences the parties face if they are convicted.

As for Raniere, I doubt he could get any plea deal with a sentence of fewer than 20 years. If he could even get one at all.


About the author

Frank Parlato





Click here to post a comment

Leave a Reply to Quad Anon Cancel reply

  • Very little seems to have been done to protect the victims of this slavery cult expriencing dissonance between facing themselves and turning a blind eye to what they observed. Already they’ve been far too lenient in the access that they’ve allowed very wealthy individuals to have, and very little for survivors.

    Why they think this is happening for no reason and is all just a misunderstanding… the accidental slavery.

    Offhand, I survived an assault recently which while on camera and in front of like 20 eye witnesses the security company that works for this corporately owned building I live in lied to the detective on the case about what was on camera. Then in trying to reach regular police they sent someone who was clearly a lawyer impersonating a police officer.

  • Talking about Nancy and what I’m supposed to believe about cults; that it’s a slow boil and trust is built over time etc

    Nancy believed Keith to be a Christlike person. Someone capable of changing the world. She believed he was more important in her daughter’s lives than their father. I’d imagine even things she might have found objectionable she kept talking herself away from because she was still convinced he was this advanced human and wonderful things were going to happen. She and her daughters would be there when they did.

    Keith had it all but wasn’t satisfied. He kept having to push and push social norms. He was petty going after anyone that left him or defied him. He couldn’t resist his own power to attempt to destroy them. If he had much of this never would have happened

    • The last sentence doesn’t make sense. Keith was/is a psychopath. He wants to destroy stuff and see pain.
      Trust is built over time. But with Nancy, Keith quickly built up trust and then clung to it for 20 yrs. Don’t underestimate Nancy letting things go because Lauren was wrapped around Keith’s finger and Nancy blamed herself for this.

      Just because Nancy said Keith was Christ-like doesn’t mean she meant it. Unfortunately for Nancy, Lauren believed her when she said stupid shit like that.

      • I disagree. But I’m no expert on cults. He attempted to destroy those that got away.

        Nancy? I’m going on the very little I’ve been able to read about her. Some say she’s devoted others claim she was stuck staying in.

        I guess one of the big questions would be; does Keith believe he’s some higher being?

        We usually don’t get the chance with cult leaders or leaders that have this type of following. They come to an abrupt end.

        • I think he does believe he’s a higher being and acted as a despot within the organization he created. It appears he was never satisfied with what he had already achieved and sought to extend his reach. He seems to have believed everyone would follow his every command. Why wouldn’t he believe that? People flocked to V-week to celebrate him. That is a huge ego trip.

          To those of us on the outside and only looking in after this pyramid has crumbled it seems so ridiculous that people would blindly follow this man and do his bidding. To us it seems clear he is no higher being and doesn’t have the answer to the meaning of life but, it seems, many people did believe it. Too many people are looking for something or someone to follow; to tell them the secrets of success; to pat them on the head and say good job. I feel sorry for the people duped by this poser but I do not have the same compassion for the ones who sat with him at the top of the pyramid. They propped him up both financially and emotionally and helped him hurt people.

    • That’s a fair accessment, I’d say, Mitch. I think connected to the “power trip” you describe is the pedohilia — the cruel truth centerpiece. Maybe because he felt more powerful exerting it over the most vulnerable or maybe girls were the weakness he needed to conquer — IDK, another time, another post.

      Yes, Nancy was entranced and on her own power trip, Maybe Needed that “humbling” Keith gave her but she’s apparently still too proud to beg or bow to the law. I’m sure the prosecution doesn’t need her at all if not at anything close to the price she’s asking.

  • Frank Report has only nine commenters. The rest are all sock puppets. Posting under other identities and as anonymous just for shits and giggles. Even Frank gets in on the action. He post in the comments under various names, defends some people, censors others. He verifies identities of people he knows aren’t who they claim.
    This is all one big conspiracy aimed at a person that comments here. But I’m not going to say who. They know. They know

        • Being as coherent as you Scott, Your sentence structure needs work also. Or, maybe, you’d like to give us all a lesson on your precious radio show. However, I would highly doubt anyone would be willing to join you. So, how exactly did you get sucked into the Amway stuff. Was it because you thought you could make some easy money at others expense. How long did it take for you to decide you were just a stupid little puppet like you are. We all know you kiss up to Frank.

          • “Kiss up” is a gross understatement. Schlock’s got his tongue so far up Frank’s ass it tickles his belly button. Schlock’s thrusting that tongue so hard, Frank’s navel might just — look out — pop right out! Ding! Turkeys’s done. Lol.

            It’s sad, indeed poignant, because Frank’s this machismo, Sicilian dude — a rightful born Don, a mensch even (farcas I know), who takes care of many others starting with the fam — in a very vulnerable place — trying to restore his family “honor,” move on with his life, maintain his means; but still in a huge legal mess, maybe facing prison himself — still trying to write his heart out of it, keep some sense of humor about it, and be concerned with not only entertaining but protecting his eclectic collection of FR readers…

            And the last goddamn thing Frank (anyone with half a heart on the side of justice here) needs is this weasly, shameless, reckless, redneck so narcissisticly determined to steal and undermine this site, he’s on it practically 24/7 bashing commenters left AND right, while convincing Frank that he’s somehow a loyal “bro” helping to keep commenters in line with the alt-right party line. “Don’t let the libtards win, Frank!” WTF?

            AND for his next stupid Narcissist trick SCOTT JOHNSON publishes Allison Mack’s home address along with detailed description of the neighborhood in the comment section on FR following a report of restraining orders being taken out by Ally against a stalker, peeping Tom!

            Who wants to set up a go fund me for slander suit against Scott Johnson?

            For the record, I never once ever joked about my sisters suicide On here or anywhere and if you or anyone on here ever repeat that bald faced lie again, I will sue you…for the sake and in the best interests of the Frank report to get you banned for real and for the good of everyone, but Scott Johnson. Except perhaps you could use some awareness that other people besides you do exist.

          • Thank you for all of that Heidi (except maybe the turkey being done part…). I don’t think anyone believed Scott’s lies about you joking about Gina.

          • Schlock saw the same sign Keith Raniere did that read: “Get rich quick by fucking your family and bestest friends, join Amway.”

            Schlock was already fucking most of his family — in the proud tradition of the “real American” Texas KKK’ers and crack whores from which he descends — and like Vanguard, Sclock also knew right away that this was the SIGN that would put him on his mission from God to someday become THE ANTI-Amway! And to riches and glory and fame if he just keeps on fucking his family and friends and everyone left, right and center!

            “Keep swinging little guy!”

      • I tried to comment under my “conspiracy” post that I was being sarcastic but for some reason it ended up farther down. For the record I’m replying to Heidi in case it happens again.

    • Mitch, you need more tin foil.
      Did Frank tell you he posts comments, or are you just guessing? Or maybe YOU are really Frank.

    • So you are implying there is a conspiracy against a poster here? Is it against Pea Onyu? What kind of conspiracy is it, and how the fuck do YOU know about it, Mitch?

  • Incredible. Close to 13 or 14 comments by Scott out of 38. Well done Scott. What would be really cool to see is if you could try for an even larger percentage of comments. — almost to the point of nearly debating yourself? Come on brother, I’m sure you are up for the task. Go for it!

  • Nancy Salzman is highly likely to negotiate a plea deal.

    1. She is 64, has health problems and being in prison is not good for anyone, let alone a woman her age and having problems
    2. She is a mother and her daughter is significantly implicated. No one wants to see their children in prison and she’ll do whatever is possible to prevent this
    3. She has her issues with Keith. 3 years ago Rainiere took away her salary of around 200K per annum because he felt she needed to become more humble. She’ll never admit to this influencing her decision but wouldn’t you be somewhat less loyal if someone took away your income and made you ask to have every bill paid?
    4. Keith took stupid risks. How do you think Nancy really feels about all that? These risks have totally blown up her life and everything she’s achieved. How loyal would you be if someone did that to you? Things can never go back to the days of her reign of Queen but at least avoiding prison would allow her to restart her private practice and pull together a career and life.

    I have no idea what the prosecution has offered her but Nancy could be “an important get” because she knows where all the bodies are buried. The only issue for Nancy is if the prosecution doesn’t really need her to put on their case or if they’re not willing to extend immunity to her daughter, Lauren. What then?

    • I agree. Well written and thoughtful post. Rare nowadays I was just saying I doubt Nancy or any of the rest rise to the level of needing witness protection. Not in the form of new identities or relocation. Protection? Yes. They all would get some form of protection if they were threatened

      • It is shadowperv posting yet under another name. Exact same crappola the perv posts with almost the same wording. No wonder he knocked on the Mack door offering his legal defense services.

      • In fairness I think #2 Frank reported. The others I would think are opinion. I’d agree with those points. I’d hope Nancy cares for her daughters.
        Keith it could be said took risk. DOS being a big one. None of it was necessary. The women were in deep enough doing his bidding. Backed by millionaires and committing the financial crimes

          • Interesting take. I hadn’t looked at it from that angle. WTF was Nancy doing while that was going on? I always assumed Lauren getting tricked into not talking to her Dad by Keith. I don’t see Nancy being ok with it or going along with it. But Michelle, too??? If Nancy did push them away from Michael, that’s a game changer. Would love to here from someone with more insight.

      • Points 2- 4 are true based on common sense. It started when Nancy started scratching her head as psycho went after Toni. He was Nancy’s gravytrain, but she was never all onboard the fucked up train ride.

          • I think you disagree with what you typed. All MLMs use the same patterns and hooks. Keith added sex to the hooks and patterns. Imagine how much more successful other MLMs would have been if they had been able to scam Guinness into saying the founder of the MLM was the smartest man in the world. Throw in a few other sprinting and judo lies and you have a psycho running a “self improvement” and sex MLM. It went the way you probably would have suspected.

    • I agree that Nancy being offered any kind of plea deal is contingent on what the prosecution can already prove. It would be wonderful is she does break the hold KAR has had on her and she starts singing. I believe it’s been mentioned here before that it’s likely no one person was privy to all that was going on within that pyramid except for KAR but Nancy would have a lot of pieces to that puzzle.

  • I doubt anyone is going into witness protection. The testimony given by such a witness will probably be easy enough to connect to them. The testimony will either be common knowledge of the inner circle or secretive enough only known by a few. The latter will be a defendant, one that took a plea or someone that came forward

    • I agree. I don’t see any NXIVM person has having enough of a potential physical threat that would result in the expense of protection. A strong admonishment from the judge and their lawyers to not cause trouble will probably be as far as this goes, unless/until they start to misbehave, and hopefully are caught in the planning stages. At that point, all hell would break loose on them.

    • The defense has the right to disclosure from the prosecution since everyone accused of crimes is entitled to defend themselves. Both sides need to know the full story. There is no such thing as a surprise witness in a real trial. The defense must be given ample time to prepare for each witness for the prosecution. Everyone is presumed innocent until found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

      • Potential Witnesses also have rights to protection from the actions of a criminal enterprise known, in fact, DESIGNED to shield it’s criminal conduct and that of its leaders from the law by intimidating, punishing, silencing, discrediting, threatening and mentally and physically harming any perceived opponents.

        If the prosecution believes, as they have stated, there’s a potential for witness tampering, witnesses can request their identities be protected, of course!

        • I agree with the physical threat of harm of a specific witness, but I’m not as sure about the rest of them (intimidating, punishing, silencing, discrediting, threatening and mentally harming any perceived opponents). And protection is not automatic protection upon request to any perceived opponent, the threat must be significant.

  • It’s not about agreeing. The prosecution is required to share their list of witnesses. And evidence. It’s called disclosure

      • The prosecution is also required to provide to the defense information they come across that would tend to make the defendant innocent. It’s call Brady disclosure: Of course, there are ways around this, as the defense doesn’t know if Brady information is being withheld by a crooked prosecutor. The defense would have to suspect this is being done, such as the prosecution having a wire tap phone conversation that makes the defendant look guilty, and the defendant knows the prosecution should also have a phone conversation that would make them appear innocent.

  • The most chilling aspect of this is how they are trying to get names and identities of cooperating witnesses. In typical nxivm style, so they can be issued death threats we guess? How does nxivm pull back prime witnesses who start to cooperate with the gov. But then change their minds? With clare and her still un named handlers its always been about controlling everything and everyone through the use of force. She is a dangerous beast, it was a mistake to let her roam free at any price. Now they are seeking names and identities of witnesses, scary indeed.

    • 1. What the defense is asking for is normal and necessary for them to conduct a defense
      2. It is also entirely normal for any witness to be afraid however if the prosecution is doing their job properly, they can protect and calm their witnesses so they can testify without fear of reprisal.
      3. Clare Bronfman is rich but she is not all powerful or crazy enough to attempt a John Gotti style reprisal. There is too much attention on her to attempt to intimidate any witnesses. I’m sure her attorney’s have cautioned her about attempting this as it would make matters much worse for her.

      Clare appears to be ably represented by her attorneys. Requests and motions such as these set the stage for what information will be presented and what cannot be; what charges can be defended and what cannot be.

      Remember, being convicted of just one charge can be a devastating felony that impacts one’ s freedom, one entire life going forward and one’s reputation. Frank is right; Nexium is finished and Keith is finished as a John Galt style savior of humanity. What happens from here forward is really just about how much freedom the defendants will have in the future.

    • Agree. Doubt Clare Bronfman will ever accept the slightest notion she’s bound by the same laws as any mere human — that she can’t buy arrests and indictments, have “connected” or “immune” PI firms if not the police conduct illegal surveillance, harass, cyberstalk, intimidate witnesses, perjur, steal from the dead, evade taxes, “manipulate human” little girls into sex, unpaid labor, crimes, self-mutilation and suicide through her alleged science foundation experiments, etc. — until Clare Bronfman is behind bars.

      May not happen in this case but if she buys her way out of jail time this round, it WILL happen because her sense of entitlement (and criminal mindedness) are such that she won’t stop until it does.

    • To: Names and identities of witnesses November 23, 2018 at 10:06 am You need to have a bit of humility and admit you were wrong. Starting ignorant threads on a website is not helpful in educating people about how things really work. Somebody could have read your comment and not come back to see that you were repeatedly corrected, and will continue to spread this false information in the future.

    • I agree, Clare is a dangerous woman made more dangerous by her public shaming of recent months. The entire world now has a glimpse of how demnented she is.
      If any of the NXIVM cabal has reason to fear it is of Clare. The rest of us will shun them.
      Yep, that good old cult practice of shunning. We, the people, will cross to the opposite side of the street when we see any of you out and about.
      NXIVM, like Scientology, likeJehovah’s Witnesses, have been exposed for how abusive they are, especially towards women.
      Ladies, think for a moment. Why are you willingly subjugating yourself to anyone or anything? Even Mao said women hold up half the sky.
      You are worthy in and of yourselves. You don’t need groups like NXIVM, etal where women enslave, torture and abuse other women.
      Allison Mack needs to hang her head in shame for how she pimped out her sisters . How she lives with her conscience is beyond me.

  • The defense is asking the government to specify or identify the following:

    RE: The Conspiracy Counts:
    1. Every individual the government contends are co-conspirators—including
    (a) unindicted co-conspirators
    (b) cooperating witnesses
    (c) confidential sources”

    Of course he defendants, if given the names of cooperating witnesses and confidential sources would never, never, never dream of
    pressuring those witnesses.
    Would they?
    And with a claimed 150 slaves plus numerous women approached for recruitment there are lots of potentil witnesses.
    Conduct that constitutes a “commercial sex act”

    the term commercial sex act means “any sex act on account of which anything of value is given to or received by any person.”

    Here is an example:
    “Give me the sexual satisfaction I demand and I won’t release the ‘collateral’ I have on you.”


  • With 12 Terebytes of information and probably dozens of witnesse statements to analyze, the Feds have quite a task. Do they put in the effort to give Bronfman’s lawyer what they have now and update it later as they continue their analysis, or wait until the judge gets impatient and orders them to provide the information to allow the defense enough time before the currently scheduled March 2019 trial, so they don’t have as much updating to do later? And as Frank mentioned, superceding indictments could change the entire landscape and delay the start of the trial.

About Frank Parlato

About Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.




Read more about Frank Report's mission.


Got A Tip?

Phone / Text: (716) 990-5740


Loading cart ...
%d bloggers like this: